Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
V.NARASINGH
Bao Viet Insurance Corporaton – Appellant
Versus
MV World Virtue – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court fees payment confirmation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. reliefs sought in admiralty suit. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. arguments on prima facie case. (Para 8) |
| 4. court's view on maintaining suit and cause of action. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. final order for vessel arrest and subsequent actions. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
ORDER :
I.A No.35 of 2025
2. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff submits that in the meanwhile deficit court fees of Rs.23,150/- has already been paid. Memo filed to the said effect is taken on record.
4. I.A is accordingly disposed of.
6. This Court is informed that the present ADMLS shall be numbered as ADMLS No.7 of 2025.
1. This matter was mentioned yesterday by the learned counsel for the Plaintiff, Mr. Biswal. At the time of mentioning, it was submitted at the Bar that there is a caveat. Therefore, learned counsel for the Plaintiff was asked to serve a copy of the petition on the caveator.
(1) Any person desiring to prevent the arrest of any property shall file in the Registry a praecipe, signed by himself or his Advocate, who may be acting for him requesting that caveat be entered against the arrest of the said property and undertaking to enter an appearan
The court upheld the arrest of a vessel due to a prima facie maritime claim regarding cargo shortfall, emphasizing the necessity to protect the Plaintiff's rights without immediate security requireme....
An action in rem against a vessel can coexist with arbitration proceedings, and the arrest of the vessel is permissible despite the invocation of arbitration.
The court confirmed that maritime claims under the Admiralty Act, 2017 allow arresting a vessel for dues irrespective of ownership, emphasizing the ship's distinct legal personality.
A breach of contract in maritime agreements may support claims for damages and penalties under the Admiralty Act 2017, classifying such disputes as maritime claims.
The court affirmed that a breach of contract under the Admiralty Act justifies a maritime claim, requiring the defendant to furnish security for damages due to failure in contractual obligations.
A claim for refund of detention charges does not fall within admiralty jurisdiction if it is not connected to a maritime claim involving a vessel.
The court established that the arrest of a vessel under the Admiralty Act requires strict adherence to the conditions set forth in Section 5, and failure to meet these conditions renders the arrest o....
An action in rem under admiralty law can proceed despite an arbitration clause, as such actions are intended for obtaining security for maritime claims.
A maritime claim can be pursued in rem against a vessel owned by a time charterer, provided the owner is liable for the claim, regardless of applicable insolvency laws.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
